Captopril or conventional therapy in hypertensive type II diabetics. Three-year analysis

Indapamide is as effective as captopril in the control of microalbuminuria in diabetes

Microalbuminuria is a predictor of overt diabetic nephropathy and macrovascular disease. Thirty-one diabetic patients with persistent urinary albumin excretion rate (AER) of 20-200 mu g min-1 were randomised to receive indapamide 2.5 mg or captopril 37.5 mg daily for 12 weeks. After a 4-week washout, patients received the alternate agent for 12 weeks. Resting blood pressure (BP), AER, cholesterol, triglycerides, and HbA1c were measured at baseline, after 6 and 12 weeks of each treatment, and after a 4-week washout period following each treatment arm. Results from patients who completed at least one treatment arm were analysed by repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). AER (median value and interquartile range) decreased significantly from baseline after treatment with indapamide and captopril [60(27-106) vs. 40(14-112) and 33(17-100); p < 0.005], but there was no difference between the effects of the two agents. Mean systolic BP (SBP) was also significantly reduced with treatment, and no difference was noted between the effects of the two agents. No correlation between changes in AER and SBP was noted with either agent. Diastolic blood pressure (DBP), cholesterol, triglycerides, and HbA1c did not change during the study. These results suggest that indapamide is an effective alternative to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in the treatment of diabetic patients with microalbuminuria.

Diabetic vascular injury and ACE. Potential for pharmacological prevention of complications of later life

Experimental studies have indicated that angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have multiple actions on the kidney and blood vessels which include both haemodynamic and antitrophic effects. Inhibition of angiotensin II and potentiation of bradykinin have both been postulated to be major mechanisms in mediating the effects of ACE inhibitors. Clinical studies have indicated that these agents postpone end-stage renal failure in macroproteinuric patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM). Indeed, these drugs are useful in both hypertensive and normotensive diabetic patients with macroproteinuria. In IDDM patients with microalbuminuria, ACE inhibitors have been shown to decrease albuminuria and to retard the development of overt renal disease. The role of these agents in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and early or overt renal disease remains to be clearly delineated. However, preliminary studies suggest a similar beneficial renoprotective effect of ACE inhibitors in NIDDM. It should be appreciated that the presence of micro- or macroproteinuria in NIDDM is a predictor of cardiovascular rather than renal morbidity and mortality. The possibility of cardiovascular protection, in addition to renal protection, being conferred by these drugs needs to be considered in both IDDM and NIDDM, although this issue has not been evaluated in detail.

Hypertension and non-insulin-dependent diabetes. A comparison between an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and a calcium antagonist

The effects of the angiotensin-converting enzyme lisinopril were compared with those of the calcium antagonist nifedipine in 162 non-insulin-dependent diabetic hypertensive patients for a 24-week period. In 83 and 79 patients, respectively, lisinopril and slow-release nifedipine produced similar reductions in blood pressure (systolic/diastolic: -16/-13 mmHg supine and -14/-11 mmHg standing after lisinopril; -15/-12 mmHg supine and -14/-11 mmHg standing nifedipine). Fasting and post-prandial plasma glucose, glycosylated haemoglobin and plasma lipids appeared to be unaffected by either agent. Also, 28% of the patients on lisinopril and 30% of those on nifedipine presented microalbuminuria. Both drugs induced a reduction in the albumin excretion rate (AER). The geometric mean x:tolerance factor of the reduction in AER among the 23 microalbuminuric patients on lisinopril (-10.0 x:1.3 micrograms/min) was greater, though not significantly so, than that observed in the 26 on nifedipine (-0.9 x 1.2 micrograms/min). Moreover, lisinopril appeared to be better tolerated than nifedipine in our study population. Microalbuminuria is an important risk factor for cardiovascular mortality in non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients as well as in the general population. To what extent a reduction in the AER could ameliorate diabetic patients is, at present, unknown. Finally, both lisinopril and nifedipine showed a similar antihypertensive effect in these patients which was not associated with significant differences in plasma glucose, insulin or lipid concentrations. The clinical consequences of the insignificant differences in AER remain unclear.

Natural history of early diabetic nephropathy: what are the effects of therapeutic intervention? Melbourne Diabetic Nephropathy Study Group

Several studies have shown that lowering of blood pressure slows the rate of progression of diabetic renal disease. Some placebo-controlled studies have also shown that angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors decrease or stabilize albuminuria in incipient nephropathy and slow the rate of progression of advanced nephropathy. However, it is not yet clear if prolonged treatment with ACE inhibitors or with other agents exerts a specific renoprotective effect in incipient diabetic nephropathy. It is proposed that such an effect should be independent from changes in systemic blood pressure and should be characterized by amelioration of the rate of rise of albumin excretion rate (AER) and the rate of fall of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and independence from changes in other parameters known to influence AER (glycemic control, protein intake, sodium intake). In addition, there should be evidence that the potentially reversible effects of therapeutic intervention on AER and GFR are translated to long-term changes in renal function and structure. This paper reviews the evidence on which the concept of renoprotection is based, with particular reference to choice of end points, heterogeneity of study groups, and complexities of the disease process, and relates this evidence to the natural history of nephropathy in type I and type II diabetes. Based on the above, an assessment is made of the comparative effects of ACE inhibitors and other antihypertensive agents on AER and GFR. It is suggested that longitudinal intra-individual analysis of both variables may be necessary in order to determine whether ACE inhibitors exert greater renoprotection than calcium channel blockers or other antihypertensive agents.

Insulin resistance in systemic hypertension: pharmacotherapeutic implications

Systemic hypertension, a vascular disease with multiple origins, now is being linked to subtle abnormalities in glucose metabolism, which include insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia. These conditions often occur together in patients with obesity, noninsulin-dependent diabetes, or both. Hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance may cause systemic hypertension through multiple mechanisms. Insulin has a salt-retaining effect on the kidney. Also, insulin can augment catecholamine release, increase vascular sensitivity to vasoconstrictor substances, and decrease vascular sensitivity to vasodilator substances. In addition, insulin can increase production of tissue growth factors and help retain sodium and calcium in cells. Insulin resistance in patients can be treated with regular aerobic exercise, weight reduction, and a high-fiber diet. Pharmacologic approaches include hypoglycemic drugs, weight-reducing agents, and certain antihypertensive drugs that may have a favorable impact on both blood pressure and insulin resistance.

Management of early nephropathy in diabetic patients

Diabetic patients go through several stages of renal disease, moving from normo- to micro- to macroalbuminuria. Good metabolic control can prevent or postpone the development of microalbuminuria, the earliest sign of diabetic renal disease. Thus, efforts should focus on obtaining the best possible control before the onset of microalbuninuria. In patients with microalbuminuria, blood pressure starts to increase, and early antihypertensive treatment becomes important. Good glycemic control may be difficult to achieve. With overt nephropathy, defined as clinical proteinuria, a relentless decline in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) occurs unless patients are carefully treated with antihypertensive agents. Protein restriction may also be necessary, but a clear beneficial effect of optimized diabetes care is difficult to document. Early screening is recommended, with an emphasis on testing for albuminuria, including microalbuminuria, along with careful control of blood pressure.

Systolic blood pressure relates to the rate of progression of albuminuria in NIDDM

We prospectively followed a cohort of 278 non-insulin-dependent (NIDDM) patients for a 6-year period, intending to estimate the rate of increase of albuminuria and to identify clinical variables that influence this increase. At baseline, normo-albuminuria (N) was seen in 74%, microalbuminuria (M) in 19% and 7% presented with proteinuria (P). A total of 80 patients died; they were older (p < 0.001) and had higher albumin excretion both at baseline and as an average during follow-up (p < 0.01). At baseline, patients with proteinuria had higher blood pressures (systolic and diastolic), whereas there was no difference between patients with normo-and microalbuminuria. Glycaemic control was increasingly poor throughout the three groups. At follow-up, an average relative rate of increase of albuminuria (slope) of 17% per year was seen both for patients with complete 6 years, follow-up (n - 135) and patients with at least 4 years follow-up (n = 178). Slope correlated significantly with systolic blood pressure (r = 0.26 and 0.29) in both groups, diastolic blood pressure only in the 4-year group (r = 0.22) and average albuminuria in both (r = 0.31 and 0.24). By multiple regression analyses systolic blood pressure and average albuminuria remained with significant influence on slope. Progression was defined as an increase in the category (e.g. normo- to microalbuminuria) as well as an increase of more than 20% in albumin excretion, and was seen in 46 patients with at least 4 years' follow-up.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Therapeutic progress. III: Diabetic nephropathy

Diabetic nephropathy is a common cause of end stage renal failure. Patients ultimately require dialysis or transplantation and endure a poor quality of life in association with increased mortality. Due to the quantitative significance of this problem there is also a considerable financial burden. It has been generally accepted that once nephropathy is established it is irreversible although aggressive anti-hypertensive treatment can delay its progression. More recently there have been numerous reports proposing a specific renal protective role of certain drugs. In this article we review the current literature on the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in diabetic nephropathy. There is strong evidence that the use of ACE inhibitors in diabetic nephropathy (in the presence or absence of hypertension) slows the progression of deterioration in renal function and may even arrest its progression if detected at the microproteinuric stage.

Systemic blood pressure and glomerular leakage with particular reference to diabetes and hypertension

Both day and night blood pressure have considerable ranges in normal individuals and also in diabetic patients. In addition, there is considerable variation intra-individually, with considerable excurses in blood pressure, e.g. during exercise, other daily activities as well as on exposure to medical personnel. There is good evidence to suggest that elevated blood pressure is an important factor in the progression of renal disease in diabetes, even from the initial phase of the slight elevation of the albumin excretion rate. From the earliest phase of microalbuminuria, blood pressure may increase by an average of 3-4 mmHg per year in contrast to 1 mmHg per year in healthy controls and in clearly normoalbuminuric individuals. Throughout the course of the complications of diabetes, both insulin-dependent and non-insulin-dependent, there is a correlation between albuminuria and blood pressure in cross-sectional studies; also there is a significant correlation between blood pressure and the progression of albuminuria. The same findings are available in essential hypertension and also to some extent in the background population, although in the latter the correlation between albuminuria and blood pressure is much less precise, although highly significant. Several trials conducted over the years uniformly show that antihypertensive treatment reduces albuminuria and, in many studies, progression in renal disease also, as measured by the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) fall. Therefore, it could be considered as a means to reduce blood pressure generally in diabetic individuals, even from the start of diabetes, with the aim of future further prevention of renal complications and possibly other complications. Such a proposal is less attractive in the background population because renal disease is much more rare. Another similar approach would be the prevention of renal disease, e.g. diabetics. Obviously, abnormalities in the vascular wall of a biochemical/functional nature may make diabetics more pressure-sensitive, and the indication is that several other risk factors are involved, in particular poor metabolic control. Nevertheless, it is proposed that trials should be conducted very early in the course of diabetes, to see if the same positive effect can be obtained early as that documented later in the course of microalbuminaria and overt renal disease, both in insulin-dependent and in non-insulin-dependent diabetes. In essential hypertension, antihypertensive treatment has a profound effect on albuminuria, and this may be associated with long-term renoprotection, but this is less well documented.